Daniel A Morgenstern1, Wendy B London, Derek Stephens, Samuel L Volchenboum, Barbara Hero, Andrea Di Cataldo, Akira Nakagawara, Hiroyuki Shimada, Peter F Ambros, Katherine K Matthay, Susan L Cohn, Andrew D J Pearson, Meredith S Irwin. 1. Daniel A. Morgenstern and Meredith S. Irwin, Hospital for Sick Children and University of Toronto; Derek Stephens, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada; Daniel A. Morgenstern, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust, London; Andrew D.J. Pearson, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, Surrey, United Kingdom; Wendy B. London, Dana-Farber/Boston Children's Cancer and Blood Disorders Center, Boston, MA; Samuel L. Volchenboum and Susan L. Cohn, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL; Barbara Hero, University Children's Hospital, Köln, Germany; Andrea Di Cataldo, University of Catania, Catania, Italy; Akira Nakagawara, Chiba University School of Medicine, Chiba, Japan; Hiroyuki Shimada, University of Southern California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles; Katherine K. Matthay, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, CA; and Peter F. Ambros, St. Anna Kinderkrebsforschung, Vienna, Austria.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The presence of distant metastases is one of the most powerful predictors of outcome in patients with neuroblastoma. However, the pattern of metastatic spread is not incorporated into current risk stratification systems. Small case series have suggested that patients with neuroblastoma who have metastatic disease limited to distant lymph nodes (4N disease) may have improved outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed retrospective data from the International Neuroblastoma Risk Group database for patients diagnosed from 1990 to 2002. 4N patients were compared with the remaining stage 4 patients (non-4N), excluding those with missing metastatic site data. RESULTS: In all, 2,250 International Neuroblastoma Staging System stage 4 patients with complete data were identified, of whom 146 (6.5%) had 4N disease. For 4N patients, event-free survival (EFS; 5-year, 77% ± 4%) and overall survival (OS; 5-year, 85% ± 3%) were significantly better than EFS (5-year, 35% ± 1%) and OS (5-year, 42% ± 1%) for non-4N stage 4 patients (P < .001). 4N patients were more likely to be younger (P < .001) and have tumors with favorable characteristics, including absence of MYCN amplification (89% v 69%; P < .001). In a multivariable analysis, 4N disease remained a significant predictor of outcome (hazard ratio for non-4N v 4N: 3.40 for EFS and 3.69 for OS). Within subgroups defined by age at diagnosis and tumor MYCN status, 4N disease was significantly associated with improved outcomes. CONCLUSION: 4N represents a subgroup with better outcome than that of other patients with metastatic disease. These findings suggest that the biology and treatment response of 4N tumors differ from other stage 4 tumors, and less intensive therapy should be considered for this cohort. Future exploration of biologic factors determining the pattern of metastatic spread is warranted.
PURPOSE: The presence of distant metastases is one of the most powerful predictors of outcome in patients with neuroblastoma. However, the pattern of metastatic spread is not incorporated into current risk stratification systems. Small case series have suggested that patients with neuroblastoma who have metastatic disease limited to distant lymph nodes (4N disease) may have improved outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed retrospective data from the International Neuroblastoma Risk Group database for patients diagnosed from 1990 to 2002. 4N patients were compared with the remaining stage 4 patients (non-4N), excluding those with missing metastatic site data. RESULTS: In all, 2,250 International Neuroblastoma Staging System stage 4 patients with complete data were identified, of whom 146 (6.5%) had 4N disease. For 4N patients, event-free survival (EFS; 5-year, 77% ± 4%) and overall survival (OS; 5-year, 85% ± 3%) were significantly better than EFS (5-year, 35% ± 1%) and OS (5-year, 42% ± 1%) for non-4N stage 4 patients (P < .001). 4N patients were more likely to be younger (P < .001) and have tumors with favorable characteristics, including absence of MYCN amplification (89% v 69%; P < .001). In a multivariable analysis, 4N disease remained a significant predictor of outcome (hazard ratio for non-4N v 4N: 3.40 for EFS and 3.69 for OS). Within subgroups defined by age at diagnosis and tumorMYCN status, 4N disease was significantly associated with improved outcomes. CONCLUSION: 4N represents a subgroup with better outcome than that of other patients with metastatic disease. These findings suggest that the biology and treatment response of 4N tumors differ from other stage 4 tumors, and less intensive therapy should be considered for this cohort. Future exploration of biologic factors determining the pattern of metastatic spread is warranted.
Authors: Edward F Attiyeh; Wendy B London; Yael P Mossé; Qun Wang; Cynthia Winter; Deepa Khazi; Patrick W McGrady; Robert C Seeger; A Thomas Look; Hiroyuki Shimada; Garrett M Brodeur; Susan L Cohn; Katherine K Matthay; John M Maris Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-11-24 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: S G DuBois; Y Kalika; J N Lukens; G M Brodeur; R C Seeger; J B Atkinson; G M Haase; C T Black; C Perez; H Shimada; R Gerbing; D O Stram; K K Matthay Journal: J Pediatr Hematol Oncol Date: 1999 May-Jun Impact factor: 1.289
Authors: H Shimada; I M Ambros; L P Dehner; J Hata; V V Joshi; B Roald; D O Stram; R B Gerbing; J N Lukens; K K Matthay; R P Castleberry Journal: Cancer Date: 1999-07-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: S Yamada; E Ishii; A Nakagawara; K Akazawa; H Tasaka; M Kajiwara; K Kawakami; K Ueda Journal: Pediatr Hematol Oncol Date: 1992 Jan-Mar Impact factor: 1.969
Authors: Veronica Moroz; David Machin; Andreas Faldum; Barbara Hero; Tomoko Iehara; Veronique Mosseri; Ruth Ladenstein; Bruno De Bernardi; Hervé Rubie; Frank Berthold; Katherine K Matthay; Tom Monclair; Peter F Ambros; Andrew D J Pearson; Susan L Cohn; Wendy B London Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2010-11-26 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Susan L Cohn; Andrew D J Pearson; Wendy B London; Tom Monclair; Peter F Ambros; Garrett M Brodeur; Andreas Faldum; Barbara Hero; Tomoko Iehara; David Machin; Veronique Mosseri; Thorsten Simon; Alberto Garaventa; Victoria Castel; Katherine K Matthay Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-12-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: G M Brodeur; J Pritchard; F Berthold; N L Carlsen; V Castel; R P Castelberry; B De Bernardi; A E Evans; M Favrot; F Hedborg Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1993-08 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Yagnesh Ladumor; Bo Kyung Alex Seong; Robin Hallett; Ivette Valencia-Sama; Teresa Adderley; Yingying Wang; Lynn Kee; Alexander Gont; David R Kaplan; Meredith S Irwin Journal: Mol Cancer Res Date: 2022-06-03 Impact factor: 6.333
Authors: Julie H Harreld; Emily M Bratton; Sara M Federico; Xingyu Li; William Grover; Yimei Li; Natalie C Kerr; Matthew W Wilson; Mary E Hoehn Journal: Pediatr Blood Cancer Date: 2015-11-24 Impact factor: 3.167
Authors: Wayne H Liang; Sara M Federico; Wendy B London; Arlene Naranjo; Meredith S Irwin; Samuel L Volchenboum; Susan L Cohn Journal: JCO Clin Cancer Inform Date: 2020-10
Authors: Daria Thompson; Kieuhoa T Vo; Wendy B London; Matthias Fischer; Peter F Ambros; Akira Nakagawara; Garrett M Brodeur; Katherine K Matthay; Steven G DuBois Journal: Cancer Date: 2015-12-28 Impact factor: 6.860